Summary: Although this article was written in March when the CCS were still in a draft stage, I still believe that it provides valuable information about the standards. The article suggests minor revisions, but in general, "the expert reviewers think [the drafts] are pretty darned good" ("Review 2). The authors of this article applaud the specificity of the standards because they state exactly what children should be learning with clear, concise examples. It is also noted that these standards are internationally competitive in mathematics, which is important because the US is behind compared to other countries. The English language arts reviews suggest that the standards should be more specific in regards to essential content that children should be learning. Overall, the authors seemed very impressed and optimistic about these standards and their potential uses in the future. The changes they suggested were submitted in order to make the CCS the best they could be.
Reflection: After reading this article, I went to the Common Core Standards website to see if these changes had been made. It appears to me that they were indeed made, and definitely improved the quality of the standards. When our class was reviewing the RI Strategic Plan, I remember that the class was mostly in agreement that the plan seemed very vague. It is obviously impossible to agree or disagree with a plan that is extremely vague and does not give a clear idea of what its purpose is. Thankfully, the CCS is in the strategic plan, so that gives me hope that the plan could indeed be successful. I am happy that changes were indeed made, because that means this plan will me more likely to work in the classroom.
Summary: This article gives a brief introduction to the Common Core Standards (CCS). It explains that the National Governors Association's Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers were the ones who developed and released these standards. It also explains the six main ideas of the movement, which are range from the standards being evidence-based to including rigorous content. It also says that not all states have adopted the standards, and that implementation of these standards could be an issue in the future. However, it fails to mention exactly how this could become a problem and what that could mean for students and teachers.
Reflection: This article is a nice introduction to the CCS. I was not aware that states are already adopting the movement, and was not sure who developed them. I am interested in finding out who else has worked on these standards and if there is a lot of backlash against these standards. This article was very helpful in helping me find an answer to my question of who developed the standards and what the main goals were. However, I wish that it were more specific about how the implementation of the standards could become a problem in the future.
Scholarly Article
Finn, Chester E. Jr. Are National Standards the Right Move? 2010. Educational Leadership, 7, 26. file:/C:/Users/Rachel/AppData/Local/Temp/HWWilsonRecords.html
Summary:
The author of this article takes the position that the United States does indeed need some sort of national standards. He states that there is no reason that children in one state should be learning different material that students in another state. However, he states that having 50 different state-specific sets of standards is not beneficial and does not improve the quality of education. He believes that the voluntary nature of the Common Core Standards is the right idea and that this is the best way to go about adopting standards. He also mentions that it is a possibility in the future that an assessment could follow the implementation of the CCS.
Reflection:
I agree with this article. I do believe that there is a need in our country for some kind of national standards because the educational gap is so large in our country. I also believe that letting states adopt these standards is the right thing to do. I do not think that forcing the CCS upon states would go over very well, and would probably lead some people to be weary about them. It is important to see that these standards are being implemented correctly and are indeed beneficial to students and teachers. I am interested in seeing if an assessment will follow this test in the future, and whether or not that puts more pressure on teachers to implement these standards exactly.
Summary:
This was a very interesting article that raised some valid points. First of all, the author argues that comparing students in the United States to students in other countries is not a simple task. Different countries have different ways of testing students and he claims that students in the US tend to be younger than students internationally in their final year of school, which is when exit testing often takes place. He also argues that other countries tend to exclude certain groups when administering tests. He gives the example of Israel, which only administers the TIMSS test to Hebrew-speaking schools, and Russia, which only allowed native speakers of the language to take the TIMSS test. He goes on to say that the United States is different because it administered the same test to 98% of the available population, which is probably at least partially to blame for our lower test scores. Furthermore, he states that countries negotiate the test items that will be on international tests and that Asian countries are very persistent about including their curricula. He states that Asian countries usually do very well in international testing, and therefore, will do what they can to keep that reputation by negotiating.
Reflection:
I agree with the author on some of these issues. First of all, I do not think that comparing students in different countries tells us who has the best school system and who doesn't. Culture, poverty level, and the amount of ESL students all effect test scores and should be taken into account. I found it shocking that countries would exclude certain students from taking tests, and if this is really true, than we obviously need to stop putting so much emphasis on comparing ourselves internationally. Also, I think that it would be very hard to design a test that covers material created around the world. If it is indeed true that Asian countries are purposefully trying to "stay on the top" in terms of test scores by biasing the tests, then I do not believe that we should hold them to such a high standard.
What are the Common Core Standards?
Rachel Jones
ERIC
Carmichael, Shelia, et al. March 2010. Review of the Draft K - 12 Common Core Standards. Thomas B. Fordham Institute. http://0-vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.helin.uri.edu/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.43Summary:
Although this article was written in March when the CCS were still in a draft stage, I still believe that it provides valuable information about the standards. The article suggests minor revisions, but in general, "the expert reviewers think [the drafts] are pretty darned good" ("Review 2). The authors of this article applaud the specificity of the standards because they state exactly what children should be learning with clear, concise examples. It is also noted that these standards are internationally competitive in mathematics, which is important because the US is behind compared to other countries. The English language arts reviews suggest that the standards should be more specific in regards to essential content that children should be learning. Overall, the authors seemed very impressed and optimistic about these standards and their potential uses in the future. The changes they suggested were submitted in order to make the CCS the best they could be.
Reflection:
After reading this article, I went to the Common Core Standards website to see if these changes had been made. It appears to me that they were indeed made, and definitely improved the quality of the standards. When our class was reviewing the RI Strategic Plan, I remember that the class was mostly in agreement that the plan seemed very vague. It is obviously impossible to agree or disagree with a plan that is extremely vague and does not give a clear idea of what its purpose is. Thankfully, the CCS is in the strategic plan, so that gives me hope that the plan could indeed be successful. I am happy that changes were indeed made, because that means this plan will me more likely to work in the classroom.
Editorial
Common Core Standards. 2010. Gifted Child Today, 33, 9.http://0-vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.helin.uri.edu/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.43
Summary:
This article gives a brief introduction to the Common Core Standards (CCS). It explains that the National Governors Association's Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers were the ones who developed and released these standards. It also explains the six main ideas of the movement, which are range from the standards being evidence-based to including rigorous content. It also says that not all states have adopted the standards, and that implementation of these standards could be an issue in the future. However, it fails to mention exactly how this could become a problem and what that could mean for students and teachers.
Reflection:
This article is a nice introduction to the CCS. I was not aware that states are already adopting the movement, and was not sure who developed them. I am interested in finding out who else has worked on these standards and if there is a lot of backlash against these standards. This article was very helpful in helping me find an answer to my question of who developed the standards and what the main goals were. However, I wish that it were more specific about how the implementation of the standards could become a problem in the future.
Scholarly Article
Finn, Chester E. Jr. Are National Standards the Right Move? 2010. Educational Leadership, 7, 26. file:/C:/Users/Rachel/AppData/Local/Temp/HWWilsonRecords.htmlSummary:
The author of this article takes the position that the United States does indeed need some sort of national standards. He states that there is no reason that children in one state should be learning different material that students in another state. However, he states that having 50 different state-specific sets of standards is not beneficial and does not improve the quality of education. He believes that the voluntary nature of the Common Core Standards is the right idea and that this is the best way to go about adopting standards. He also mentions that it is a possibility in the future that an assessment could follow the implementation of the CCS.
Reflection:
I agree with this article. I do believe that there is a need in our country for some kind of national standards because the educational gap is so large in our country. I also believe that letting states adopt these standards is the right thing to do. I do not think that forcing the CCS upon states would go over very well, and would probably lead some people to be weary about them. It is important to see that these standards are being implemented correctly and are indeed beneficial to students and teachers. I am interested in seeing if an assessment will follow this test in the future, and whether or not that puts more pressure on teachers to implement these standards exactly.
Analysis Article
Tienken, Christopher H. Common Core State Standards: I Wonder? For the Record, Kappa Delta Pi, 1, 14 - 17. http://0-vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.helin.uri.edu/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.43Summary:
This was a very interesting article that raised some valid points. First of all, the author argues that comparing students in the United States to students in other countries is not a simple task. Different countries have different ways of testing students and he claims that students in the US tend to be younger than students internationally in their final year of school, which is when exit testing often takes place. He also argues that other countries tend to exclude certain groups when administering tests. He gives the example of Israel, which only administers the TIMSS test to Hebrew-speaking schools, and Russia, which only allowed native speakers of the language to take the TIMSS test. He goes on to say that the United States is different because it administered the same test to 98% of the available population, which is probably at least partially to blame for our lower test scores. Furthermore, he states that countries negotiate the test items that will be on international tests and that Asian countries are very persistent about including their curricula. He states that Asian countries usually do very well in international testing, and therefore, will do what they can to keep that reputation by negotiating.
Reflection:
I agree with the author on some of these issues. First of all, I do not think that comparing students in different countries tells us who has the best school system and who doesn't. Culture, poverty level, and the amount of ESL students all effect test scores and should be taken into account. I found it shocking that countries would exclude certain students from taking tests, and if this is really true, than we obviously need to stop putting so much emphasis on comparing ourselves internationally. Also, I think that it would be very hard to design a test that covers material created around the world. If it is indeed true that Asian countries are purposefully trying to "stay on the top" in terms of test scores by biasing the tests, then I do not believe that we should hold them to such a high standard.